This invention relates to the field of toilet seat lifters, and more specifically, to toilet seat lifters operated by application of pressure by the user's foot.
Many prior art foot actuated toilet seat lifting devices are known, employing levers, rods cables, air and fluid displacing pistons. The force of the users foot is transmitted to the toilet seat, so that the seat is lifted without the inconvenience of bending over and without any possible health risk from hand contact with the seat.
None of the prior art devices have achieved wide acceptance and use in the United States. This lack of acceptance and use is believed to be due, at least in part, to several disadvantages inherent in the design of prior art devices. These disadvantages relate to a lack of acceptable operation over a wide range of user conditions, mechanical complexity that makes them too expensive, and the need for elaborate installation procedures that are unacceptable to customers. Although most of the prior art devices are utilitarian and functional in lifting the toilet seat they lack the adequate or cost effective design to also 1) prevent the seat from slamming into the lid if the user abruptly applies force to the device and 2) allow the gentle return of the seat even when the user's foot is abruptly removed from the device. Devices such as that disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,030,146 of Pilkington and U.S. Pat. No. 4,649,576 of Lillie provide no protection against slamming during abrupt seat lift and only damp the force associated with lowering of the seat but do not prevent the slamming back down of the seat if the user's foot is abruptly removed from the device. U.S. Pat. No. 3,055,016 of Kemp uses multiple levers and foot pedals, complex linkages, does not provide for adjustability of the air cylinder to different height toilets, and is very difficult to install. U.S. Pat. No. 3,504,385 of Fields positions a cylinder vertically behind the lifting arm which seriously limits its anti slamming down protection capability. The prior art devices make no provision for user comfort such as if the user is barefoot when using the toilet in the middle of the night. Devices such as U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,975,988 of Won, and 4,426,743 and 4,470,161 of Seabrooke, are so mechanically complex (consequently expensive) and require such elaborate installation procedures that they are commercially unviable.
A simple, inexpensive, readily installable, easily adjustable device is needed that provides a smooth lift without slamming, prevents the seat from being left up, and provides a gentle return of the toilet seat regardless of the abruptness or variations in pressure exerted by the user on the device. The device must also feel soft and comfortable to use.